Oh No! Another "No Child Left Behind"
Tue Jul 22, 2008 at 07:48:48 PM PDT
I’ve posted before on childhood cancer. You kind ladies voted me on the island, as long as I mind my manners.
But a recent article in CURE magazine entitled No Child Left Behind frightens me. And it should you too. Because if you have kids, know kids, are a kid, then you should know that 1 in 300 kids are diagnosed with cancer before the age of 20. 4 out of 5 of them survive at least 5 years. But the long term affects of using smaller doses of adult chemo regimes effects them developmentally, internally, and increases the chances of secondary cancers.
So, why don’t we just develop new drugs specifically for children......I mean it’s the #1 Killer disease of kids today.
Well, it’s not that simple. Unfortunately, childhood cancer is considered "rare". There are two definitions of rare: 1) happening to you or 2) happening to someone else. That’s it. And, do you define rare as something that impacts over 12,000 kids every year? Something that has 40,000 kids in treatment every single year?
They know the problem. Like I said, they even write about it. CURE Magazine, June 2008, No Child Left Behind:
The problem, at least in dollar terms, is that most children are healthy. In the health consumer market, big patients simply overpower little ones. In any given year, more than one million adults will learn they have cancer, but less than 13,000 children under age 19 will get the same diagnosis. To makes things worse, at least for the bottom line, the common cancers— breast, prostate, colon, and lung—occur rarely, if at all, in minors, who tend to suffer leukemias and brain, bone, connective tissue, and nervous system malignancies. For drug companies wanting and needing robust sales, and even taking into account orphan product allowances, children’s cancers are often too infrequent to be profitable.
"It’s a real problem getting pharmaceuticals specifically for children," says Jessica Boklan, MD, of Phoenix Children’s Hospital. Mostly, they get the hand-me downs. "It’s pure economics."
Don’t you just hate it when they can’t make money on saving your child’s life? I do.
As with most things, funding for cancer research is a Public Relations game. Breast cancer is the big winner because Susan G Komen has been brilliant in its approach to awareness and fund raising. They also benefit because although many women get breast cancer not that many (relatively speaking) actually die (no offense intended). Prostate cancer has cute little Katie and a little camera. Lung cancer is a loser because everyone thinks you got it from your own stupidity or bad habits. But lung cancer kills many more women than breast cancer. But, only 3000 children, "rarely" die from cancer every year. Doesn't even make sense. Childhood cancer has CureSearch spreading the word. Ever heard of them?
I gotta tell you, the more you learn about the system the more pissed off you get.....
Here is my childhood awareness campaign.....please help out. Spread it around. I'm making progress. CureSearch, LIVESTRONG, Alex's Lemonade Stands, they all wrote about it on their sites. Hospitals are letting me set it up on the kid's cancer floors and clinics. It's almost bizarre. But its real. You can help. Click and sign.
thanks
